[Wallet] Replace OrderedTxItems(..) with in-memory map #4702

1. 
   cozz commented at 1:15 am on August 15, 2014: contributor

   I was wondering why adding 18000 transactions to the wallet takes ages. One of the reasons is CWallet::OrderedTxItems(..). So maintain the map in-memory instead of generating it all the time. This pull should not change any functionality.
2. 
   BitcoinPullTester commented at 5:08 pm on August 18, 2014: none

   Automatic sanity-testing: PASSED, see http://jenkins.bluematt.me/pull-tester/p4702_6b18a63a5099a6011187f20d05f2357a5bb4b2ea/ for binaries and test log. This test script verifies pulls every time they are updated. It, however, dies sometimes and fails to test properly. If you are waiting on a test, please check timestamps to verify that the test.log is moving at http://jenkins.bluematt.me/pull-tester/current/ Contact BlueMatt on freenode if something looks broken.
3. laanwj added the label Wallet on Aug 19, 2014
4. [Wallet] Store accounting entries in memory ef91f51e68
5. [Wallet] Replace OrderedTxItems(..) with in-memory map ac09e08364
6. cozz force-pushed on Oct 3, 2014
7. 
   cozz commented at 3:47 am on October 3, 2014: contributor

   rebased
8. 
   laanwj commented at 11:40 am on February 9, 2015: member

   @jonasschnelli is working on larger changes to the wallet, and adding a ’netwallet’ based on a new database. There doesn’t seem to be much point in improving the performance of the legacy wallet, with risk of breaking things. So I’m closing this, sorry.
9. laanwj closed this on Feb 9, 2015

   ---

10. 
    ghost commented at 12:27 pm on October 26, 2015: none

    Any news on this wallet by @jonasschnelli ? I ask because a number of useful ideas seem to have been by-passed in favor of this option.
11. 
    jonasschnelli commented at 12:32 pm on October 26, 2015: contributor

    Still working on the wallet. Currently I’m exploring some hardware wallet stuff. Soon I’m back refactoring the wallet. Very likely I’m going to remove everything node related from my core-wallet fork and support SPV*RPC (qt) wallet connection to a trusted full node. Bundling the two (for deployment) could still be possible.
12. 
    MarcoFalke commented at 12:50 pm on October 26, 2015: member

    This seems related to #6851?
13. 
    ghost commented at 12:54 pm on October 26, 2015: none

    hehehe, it’ll be a year soon and likely any work you do will take a while longer. Why don’t we re-consider the most useful pull requests and maybe merge them? Then later when your version becomes available, we can allow users to have a choice? I see no downside to this and would be willing to put in some hours towards these goals.
14. MarcoFalke locked this on Sep 8, 2021

Contributors
cozz BitcoinPullTester laanwj ghost jonasschnelli MarcoFalke

Labels
Wallet